[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 241 KB, 1912x1080, 7A111E40-B027-4BB4-BF01-49F5A5055BDB.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22371272 No.22371272 [Reply] [Original]

I’m about to rawdog KJV Bible with no prior knowledge of anything related to Christianity and English not being my first tongue. Will I get anything out of it? I’m starting from Genesis and working my way up.

>> No.22371284

If you actually go through with it, your life will change forever

>> No.22371297

>>22371272
Either you will gain nothing or you will gain everything.

>> No.22371322

>>22371272
if you havent read the bible theres no point in reading any other book, thats basically only requirement when getting into literature: read the bible first. in my orthodox country, children bible’s are very popular and we grow up reading them, then we move on to the real deal.

>> No.22371336

Look into getting the Norton Critical edition of the KJV, commentary and notes illuminate and clarify, particularly if you’re looking for a literary reading

>> No.22371340

>>22371272
Why wouldn't you just read the bible in your native language, are you an oriental?

>> No.22371349

>>22371340
Idk man, i just find the prose of the KJV very beautiful, i’ll read it in my native language in the future

>> No.22371363

>>22371349
What's your native language? I always assumed every major language European language would have the same variety of bible translations as English.

>> No.22372510

>>22371272
don't go front to back. you'll drop it in the middle of the Pentateuch.

do Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, John, Epistles, OT, Revelation.
you can skip Chronicles the first time around, it's basically showing the genealogies of the people in the books before it.

>> No.22372822
File: 53 KB, 700x971, new-oxford-annotated-bible.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22372822

I highly recommend this one instead.
It's written in modern English, it's assembled from several different sources by a team of experts, and it's explained and cross-referenced thoroughly.
Plus, it's free to download on archive.org .

>> No.22372914

>>22372822
Convenient theft is still theft, anon.

>> No.22372939

>>22372914
What theft?

>> No.22373081

>>22371272
Genesis and Exodus are okay. Then the next 3 books are incredibly boring. Then the rest of the Old Testament is pretty interesting with a couple of very excellent books. The New Testament is absolute garbage not fit to wipe your ass with.

>> No.22373089

>>22372510
>starting with the Gospels
Terrible idea, you're not gonna understand any of the lore

>> No.22373095

>>22371272
you need to start with da greeks

>> No.22373099

>>22371272
There are parts that detail specific ways of decorating altars, doing sacrifices, making priestly vestments, and so on. They go on for pages at times, and you'll want to skim through a lot of it. It might be a good idea to take it book by book, rather than a complete read through. Keep in mind certain things, like numbers; arithmancy was important in the ancient world, and the number of times something happens, or the number of people or objects in a story, can be symbolic.

>> No.22373100
File: 108 KB, 600x645, 402632161019211.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22373100

>it's assembled from several different sources by a team of experts

>> No.22373107

>>22371284
he'll probably get bored right after story of moses. he'll skip deuteronomy and numbers for being totally irrelevant kike lawslop. maybe he'll read kings, samuel, and joshua, but Chronicles? it's just a retelling, he'll skip that as well. psalms? utterly boring. he'll probably read about 10% of them. the rest of the prophets? again, maybe 10% he'll actually be able to get through. only thing else he'll read in the old testament is job. then he'll find that there are four different retellings of the same story in the new testament, so he'll probably skip at least one of them if not two. the come the endless letters. he'll read about 75%. obviously he won't become a christcuck since it's impossible after seeing how utterly shit most of the old testament was and how irrational and schizophrenic the new testament was. basically a bunch of trannies get all hysterical about the end of the world which never comes. well, they also wrote some sentimental shit about love that no one who reads it will ever actually apply into their lives, so I guess it was all worth it.

>> No.22373215

>>22373100
Then feel free to point out where the NRSV deviates from whatever you consider "canon".
Let me guess...you don't have a clue.
Yet another 4chan brainlet.

>> No.22373224

>>22373107
Ugh...Deuteronomy.
Hey, look, everyone, we found an ancient scroll in a temple that just, by coincidence, happens to support all the stuff we want to change! Don't ask where the scroll came from; it's God's will! And God now says that the insanely bloody schedule of animal sacrifices established in Leviticus only has to happen in Jerusalem! Isn't that convenient? Don't ask questions; you just gotta have faith!

>> No.22373262
File: 58 KB, 1024x766, full.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22373262

>>22373215
>Let me guess...you don't have a clue.

>> No.22373555

>>22373262
I accept your concession.
Or you could just point out where the NRSV deviates from whatever you consider "canon".

>> No.22373578

>>22373089
literally the other way around.

>> No.22373587

>>22373578
OP says he doesn't know anything about Christianity, he's not gonna understand the significance of anything that happens in the gospels without reading at least some of the OT

>> No.22373630

>>22373587
there's footnotes for the connections.
if he starts with the OT he'll probably not understand anything at all.
The epistles alone will probably clear a bunch of things up before he even reads them.

>> No.22373665

>>22373630
The epistles are like 90% doctrine, about as interesting to a non-believer as all the tabernacle shit in Exodus. He hasn't said he wants to convert, I'm assuming he's approaching it as a piece of literature

>> No.22373677

>>22373665
yeah, but that doctrine is based on the rest of Scripture.
he would have no idea of what the Exodus and Deuteronomy laws mean and are pointing at without Paul expounding on it.

>> No.22373679

>>22373677
or, rather, they're pure exegesis.
to bring it forth Paul and the others explain Scripture.

>> No.22373692

>>22373677
But what I'm saying is he isn't gonna care about any of that. Unless you're already invested in it, you're not gonna care. Genesis is honestly a perfect starting point for anyone reading the Bible

>> No.22373718

>>22373692
it's a worse starting point because he won't understand any of it.
it isn't a book you can just pick up and understand the immense depth of by just skimming.

>> No.22374079

>>22373718
Depth?
Please explain the depth of Genesis 19:
[30] And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters.
[31] And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth:
[32] Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.
[33] And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.
[34] And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our Father.
[35] And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.
[36] Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.

>> No.22374339

>>22373718
>it's a worse starting point because he won't understand any of it
What do you mean by "understand?" It's a bunch of stories, and they form the foundation on which everything else in the Bible is built

>> No.22374350

>>22373555
he's redditposting. it means he doesn't know shit.
he's redditposting about KJV-onlyism. He /really/ doesn't know shit.

>> No.22374525

>>22371272
Read the New Testament first. You'll be left with the impression that the Old makes little to no sense outside of Jewish culture if you start with the Old.

>> No.22374582

>>22374525
Marcion Of Sinope assembled the first version of the Christian Bible from various separate "books" that were floating around at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope
He was a gnostic, and he deliberately structured the Old Testament and New Testament to make it clear he considered the Old Testament God to be the Demiurge, i.e. the blind & insane creator of our universe.
In that sense, the Old Testament makes perfect sense.

>> No.22374617

>>22374582
>implying every single Christian would've let that happen
>implying the canon was already set

>> No.22374620

>>22374582
>the wikipedia page itself proves your argument wrong by discussing how he was called a heretic and excommunicated
lol.

even the usual wiki editors that end up biased against it just blew that up with facts.

>> No.22374655

>>22371340
Tbh mine native language, Brazilian portuguese, has terrible translations, imo. They have the driest prose imaginable, they feel like chemistry books

>> No.22374736

>>22371272
Go to church and listen to it being read. It'll make more sense in the long run.

>> No.22374741

>>22374655
grab the Almeida Revista Atualizada.
it doesn't have the dry language of others like the Almeida Corrigida Fiel, and i personally find it even more accurate to the original.

funnily enough i think we have the better kind of translations. Most of them are decent, and the ones that aren't can be called out with a glance.

>> No.22374744

>>22374079
The fact that you respond with one of the most memed "weird" parts of the bible prove you're nothing but a pseud contrarian faggot. You could have chosen Genesis 38, Judges 19, Ezekiel 23, which are far more funny than some run-off-the-mill incest. Git gud skrub

>> No.22374749

>>22374655
also if you're op, grab C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity (Cristianismo Puro e Simples).
iirc it's published by the thomas nelson publishing house. they're all quite pleasant special hardcovers. and not too expensive.

>> No.22374764

>>22374741
>>22374749
I'm not OP but I'll check them out, thanks.

>> No.22375502

>>22371322
There are at least 30 books to read before the Bible in the Western Canon and that's a very conservative estimate.

>> No.22375525

>>22372510
Chronicles is only genealogies for the first little bit.

>> No.22375541

>>22371272
If you go into it already not believing in jewish Harry Potter fantasy tales, you're going to be incredibly bored.

>> No.22375766

>>22375525
oh no. i've confused it then.
they'll atleast read it in the second go, i hope.
gotta fix that now.
>>22372510

>> No.22376350

>22375541
>Harry Potter fantasy tales
Really anon? Try a little harder next time. No (You) for low effort b8.

>> No.22376820

Since this is an ESL thread I gotta ask: What's the Spanish equivalent of KJV? As in having a beautiful and fancy prose? I only find Reina Valera (absolute shit) or catholic Bibles from Spain which are way too simplified in their prose.

>> No.22376911

>>22371272
You'll learn to put your own peace of mind first, to recognize the value of a clean conscience, to accept involuntary solitude as an acceptable alternative to toxic relationships, to never trust a priest, preacher, or president, and that there is neither a god nor a need for one in this world. In short, you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free. Read every word. There is a secret concealed within the genealogies and knowing it is your vaccination against the political mind-virus that calls itself Christianity. Enjoy the ride, young scholar, it is worth the effort.

>> No.22377435

>>22372914
what did he mean by this?

>> No.22377465

>>22371272
unless you are reading it in the insane religious schizo lens or are super interested in history and reading ancient literature, most of the stuff in the bible is not going to be interesting.
that being said there are chunks of it that are essential reading for anyone interested in literature like psalms, genesis, job, the gospels etc. reading it cover to cover is probably a fucking horrible idea though

>> No.22377512
File: 275 KB, 1024x962, do it nigga.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22377512

>>22371272
You'll understand basically none of it.
Idiot fundies will bitch about it, but you need some sort of lens to interpret the Bible historically.
>assyriology
>classics
>Roman frontier history
>hebrew midrash bullshit
>other big religion
Any of this will help you understand the Bible as a piece of history. If you don't know the historical context then good luck deriving moral context. I'm not surprised so few people read the Bible, the translations are good but it's still ancient legend (Genesis), fable (Job), centuries of chronicles, prophecy, and biography. What a book. There's a reason most people rely on a pastor to guide their reading to some degree.

>Will I get anything out of it?
>starting with Genesis
Probably not, you have to dive deep into it or it just kind of all blurs past you.

>> No.22377514

>>22376820
Whatever is a direct translation of the Vulgate. The KJV was "translated" by protestant heretics.

>> No.22377527

>>22373089
>>22373677
>>et alii
Starting with the Gospels is a decent idea. You follow the story of only one guy instead of a series of tribe leaders. You also get the benefit of the story being told again and again by different people that all emphasize different details.
>noooo the old testament references
It's fine.

>> No.22378219

>>22374744
The point is that the Bible doesn't show any consequences of this drunken incestuous behavior.
In fact, the descendants of one daughter become the Moabites. Ruth (who has her own book in the Bible) was a Moabite, and is a direct ancestor of Jesus.
Sort of the opposite of showing consequences for what seems like indefensible behavior.

>> No.22378249

>>22373107
>he'll probably get bored right after story of moses. he'll skip deuteronomy and numbers for being totally irrelevant kike lawslop. maybe he'll read kings, samuel, and joshua, but Chronicles? it's just a retelling, he'll skip that as well. psalms? utterly boring. he'll probably read about 10% of them. the rest of the prophets? again, maybe 10% he'll actually be able to get through. only thing else he'll read in the old testament is job.
Kek literally me. Spot on, anon

>> No.22378284
File: 36 KB, 400x386, pepe-old.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22378284

Who could ever forget the gripping tale of Numbers 33?
[5]: And the children of Israel removed from Rameses, and pitched in Succoth. [6]: And they departed from Succoth, and pitched in Etham, which is in the edge of the wilderness. [7]: And they removed from Etham, and turned again unto Pi-hahiroth, which is before Baal-zephon: and they pitched before Migdol. [8]: And they departed from before Pi-hahiroth, and passed through the midst of the sea into the wilderness, and went three days' journey in the wilderness of Etham, and pitched in Marah. [9]: And they removed from Marah, and came unto Elim: and in Elim were twelve fountains of water, and threescore and ten palm trees; and they pitched there. [10]: And they removed from Elim, and encamped by the Red sea. [11]: And they removed from the Red sea, and encamped in the wilderness of Sin. [12]: And they took their journey out of the wilderness of Sin, and encamped in Dophkah. [13]: And they departed from Dophkah, and encamped in Alush. [14]: And they removed from Alush, and encamped at Rephidim, where was no water for the people to drink. [15]: And they departed from Rephidim, and pitched in the wilderness of Sinai. [16]: And they removed from the desert of Sinai, and pitched at Kibroth-hattaavah. [17]: And they departed from Kibroth-hattaavah, and encamped at Hazeroth. [18]: And they departed from Hazeroth, and pitched in Rithmah. [19]: And they departed from Rithmah, and pitched at Rimmon-parez. [20]: And they departed from Rimmon-parez, and pitched in Libnah. [21]: And they removed from Libnah, and pitched at Rissah. [22]: And they journeyed from Rissah, and pitched in Kehelathah. [23]: And they went from Kehelathah, and pitched in mount Shapher. [24]: And they removed from mount Shapher, and encamped in Haradah. [25]: And they removed from Haradah, and pitched in Makheloth. [26]: And they removed from Makheloth, and encamped at Tahath. [27]: And they departed from Tahath, and pitched at Tarah. [28]: And they removed from Tarah, and pitched in Mithcah. [29]: And they went from Mithcah, and pitched in Hashmonah. [30]: And they departed from Hashmonah, and encamped at Moseroth. [31]: And they departed from Moseroth, and pitched in Bene-jaakan. [32]: And they removed from Bene-jaakan, and encamped at Hor-hagidgad. [33]: And they went from Hor-hagidgad, and pitched in Jotbathah. [34]: And they removed from Jotbathah, and encamped at Ebronah. [35]: And they departed from Ebronah, and encamped at Ezion-gaber. [36]: And they removed from Ezion-gaber, and pitched in the wilderness of Zin, which is Kadesh. [37]: And they removed from Kadesh, and pitched in mount Hor, in the edge of the land of Edom.

>> No.22378291

>>22378284
some Bibles usually have maps in the first few pages after the cover.
Follow with them.

>> No.22378314

>>22378291
Regarding Numbers 33, the NRSV says "Many sites are not mentioned elsewhere; most are not geographically identifiable."

>> No.22378337

>>22378219
there were.
go see the ramifications of it in the ammonites and moabites; two pagan peoples, enemies of God's people, which led to constant battle between them.

they were not immediately punished the same way Solomon wasn't; God still used them for good, even with their sins. Their sin, however, brought on its consequence (and they were properly judged after dying, alongside that).

As for Ruth, that's where that sin is taken care of.
through her faith and obedience to God, the sin of Lot and his daughters is redeemed.

As with all of the Bible, God uses imperfect men (as all are) to usher forth perfection.
Even in their sin, through faith they are used for good.

>> No.22378368

>>22378337
Seems awfully indirect to me.
Almost like you're jumping to conclusions on a thin pretext.

>> No.22378505

>>22378368
incest = moab and ben-ammi
moab = originates the moabite people, who turn away from God
ben-ammi = originates the ammonites, who also turn away
both constantly fight with God's people.

Ruth = in obedience and faith she keeps chaste with Boaz, and turns to God again.
In doing that, she is blessed by being part of God's plan for salvation, in being David's great-grandmother, and a part of Jesus' genealogy.
by turning from sin she helps bring peace.

it isn't really indirect or thin at all.

>> No.22379439

>>22371272
If you have at least read a bit about the ancient greeks and the canaanites you should be good